What Is Preterism? Part 2

The prophecies in the Word of God make sense and speak for themselves. Gary reviews Old and New Testament prophecies that show how the destruction of Jerusalem was the focus of their intent. Most of Revelation does not relate future events, but instead the events of the first century in the Roman Empire.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• revelation
• daniel 9
• full preterism
• partial preterism
• preterism
• straw man argument
• historical preterism
• antichrist
• roman catholics
• scholars
• apostle's creed
• dispensational view
• stephen myers
• end times
• destruction of jerusalem

[CrossWorkMinistries]

Dispensationalists who teach pre-trib rapture do not teach anything in the book of Revelation has happened yet. Everything in Revelation is future. You are confusing dispensational theology and denominational theology.

[Daesonjei]

Question Mr. De Mar... Rev 11:3 "And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth." If this already happened then why has there been no written history by either biblical or secular historians about this remarkable event? I don't get it... does this mean that Jesus has already come back?

[rkg62976]

I would encourage anyone interested in studying Bible prophecy to use the tremendous resource work: [Froom, LeRoy E. (1948). "The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers", 4 volumes. Review and Herald Publishing: Washington D.C.] *Both of the above quotations are taken from vol.2 of his work (p.487-488).

In this work, Dr. Froom documents the history of eschatological interpretation, concentrating upon the historic Protestant view as one that Protestants today should NOT be abandoning.

[rkg62976]

Roman Catholics, as well as Protestants, admit to the origin of the "preterist" and "futurist" eschatological systems.

"The Futuristic School, founded by the Jesuit Ribera in 1591, looks for Antichrist, Babylon, and a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem, at the end of the Christian Dispensation. The Praeterist School, founded by the Jesuit Alcasar in 1614, explains the Revelation by the Fall of Jerusalem, or by the fall of Pagan Rome in 410 A.D." [G.S.Hitchcock, "The Beasts and the Little Horn"]

[rkg62976]

"Accordingly...two of her [Rome's] most learned doctors set themselves to the task...of diverting men's minds from perceiving the fulfillment of the prophecies of the Antichrist in the Papal system. The Jesuit Alcasar devoted himself to bring into prominence the PRETERIST method of interpretation...and thus endeavoured to show that the prophecies of Antichrist were fulfilled before the Popes ever ruled at Rome..."

[Joseph Tanner. "Daniel and Revelation", p.16-17]

[rkg62976]

Indeed, the "great tribulation" is a subject that requires some study. But this does not mean that futurists are correct in asserting that this will be a 7 year time period. In fact, this theory is based upon a misinterpretation of the prophecy of Dan.9:24-27. Futurists attempt to make v.27 about antichrist, when in fact, the entirety of the prophecy is MESSIANIC in nature, and has NOTHING to do with antichrist. Dan.9:27 is about Jesus Christ, not antichrist.

[akaboo69]

@rkg62976 eschatology is confusing some believe that the great tribulation is a symbolic period of the time between the first and 2nd coming of Christ

[rkg62976]

That is my point. The preterist interpretation is DEPENDENT on the theory that the book of Revelation is written prior to 70 A.D. The system fails without adequate proof of their claim. I would look at Ken Gentry's videos in which his view is completely dependent on a pre-70 A.D. date. The "proof" he gives is flawed, however.

[mhuggi]

Just because most agree does not mean it is true/correct. There is good evidence, internal and external, that it could have been written prior to AD 70. Even if it was written prior to AD 70 doesn't necessitate a preterist interpretation.

[rkg62976]

Both the preterist and futurist view are in great error, and both of them veer greatly from the traditional, historic, Protestant position of biblical eschatology.

Rev.11:1 is NOT speaking of the literal temple in Jerusalem, but of believers. It is truly amazing to me that the preterist interpretation is almost entirely dependent on the assertion that the book of Revelation must have been written prior to 70 A.D. Most scholars agree that it was written c.95-96 A.D.